Contents of social cohesion: key accents of contemporary scientific discourse in three social spaces
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31392/iscs.2022.21.029Ключові слова:
contents of social cohesion, scienti췽c discourse, North-American social space, European social space, Ukrainian social space, interdisciplinarity, measurement models of the content of social cohesionАнотація
The article is devoted to the analysis of key concepts related to the interpretation of the contents of the “social cohesion” phenomenon in three social spaces — North-American, European and Ukrainian. Attention is focused on the works of researchers from the middle of the 20th to the 췽rst twenty years of the 21st century. It is emphasized that the discourse of this period is characterized by two trends in the statements of Western researchers: a) opinions are expressed that the phenomenon remains in the center of research attention; b) sometimes research attention to the phenomenon decreases. The authors present the most generalized and most widespread de췽nitions of the concept of “social cohesion” in the scienti췽c discourse, analyze certain new trends in its interpretation in comparison with previous periods, drawing attention to the fact that recently there has been a tendency to increase the operationalization of the concepts in the discourse.
The article contains an analysis of the development of a large pool of researchers of social cohesion from the countries of North America and Europe, as well as the basis for the development of scienti췽c discourse in the Ukrainian social space and the possibility of its inclusion in the global discourse.
Посилання
Deineko Oleksandra. 2021. Krytychnyi ohlyad modeli vymiryuvannya sotsial’noyi zhurtovanosti Dzh. Chana Perspektyvy adaptatsiyi do ukrayins’koho kontekstu (Critical review of the model for measuring of social cohesion of Chan J.: Perspectives of adaptation to Ukrainian context). Visnyk NYUU imeni Yaroslava Mudroho. Seriya: Filosoya, losoya prava, politolohiya, sotsiolohiya: 4(51). https://doi.org/10.21564/2663-5704.51.242243.
Deineko Oleksandra. 2021. Sotsial’na zhurtovanist’ yak katehoriya derzhavnoyi polityky: osoblyvosti konstruyuvannya v ukrayins’komu zakonodavstvi (Social cohesion as a category of state policy: peculiarities of constructing in Ukrainian legislation). Visnyk NYUU imeni Yaroslava Mudroho. Seriya: Filoso ya, loso ya prava, politolohiya, sotsiolohiya. 2(49). https://doi.org/10.21564/2663-5704.49.229332.
Drozhzhyna S.V. 2006. Tolerantnist’ yak diyevyi chynnyk demokratyzatsiyi suchasnoho ukrayins’koho suspil’stva (Tolerance as acting factor of democratization of Ukrainian society). Multiversum. Filisofs’kyi visnyk. 55, 46–51.
Yevtukh V.B., Kisla G.O., Savenkova L.V. Immigranty u konteksti etnonatsional’nykh peotsesiv (Immigrants in context of ethno-national processes). Kyiv: Interservis. 192 s.
Zlobina O. 2020. Stan sotsial’noyi napruzhenosti suchasnoho ukrayins’koho suspil’stva za otsinkamy naselennya (The state of tension of Ukrainian society in estimations of population). Ukrayins’ke suspil’stvo: monitoring sotsial’nykh zmin. Vypusk 7 (21). Kyyiv: Instytut sotsiologiyi NAN Ukrayiny, 95–101.
Kolesnichenko M.V. 2021. Problematyka sotsial’noyi kohesiyi e zarubizhnomy naukovomy dyskursi (Problems of social cohesion in foreing scientific discourse). Osvitniy dyscurs. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats’. Vypusk 35 (7). Kyiv, 17–32.
Lishchyns’ky Ihor. 2019. Polityka terytorial’noyi kohesiyi (Police of territorial cohesion). Zhurnal yevropeis’koyi ekomomiky. 18, 387–403. dspace.wunu.edu.ua/bitstream/РŻРĘРľРŸРİРąРňРŽРŸРŹ
Orzhel’ O. Yu. 2012. Zastosuvannya dosvidu zhurtuvannya Yevropeis’koho Soyuzu dlya formumuvannya polityky natsional’noyi konsolidatsiyi ukrayins’koho suspil’stva: etap vyroblennya indykatoriv (Adaptation of experience of European Union to formation of national consolidation of Ukrainian society: the stage of elaboration of indicators). Investytsiyi: praktyka ta dosvid. No 14.
Orzhel’ O. Yu. 2012. Konsolidatsiya ukrains’koho suspil’stva na osnovi natsional’noyi ideyi: perspektyvy i obmezhennya (z tochky zory yevropeis’koho dosvidy) [Consolidation of Ukrainian society upon the national idea: perspektyvy i limits (from European experience’ view]. Ekonomika ta derzhava. 8, 102–105. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ecde_2012_8_32.
Orzhel’ O. Yu. 2012. Kontseptual’ni pidkhody do vuznachennya sotsial’noho zhurtuvannya (Conceptual approaches to the denition of social cohesion). www.dridu.dp.ua/zbirnik/2012-01(7).
Polishchuk Yuriy. 2019. Vydy suspil’noyi konsolidatsiyi u pidkhodakh vitchyznyanykh doslidnykiv (Species of social consolidation in publications of domestic researchers). Naukovi zapysky IPiEND im. I.F. Kurasa NAN Ukrayiny. 3–4(95–96), 73–93.
Ukrayins’ke suspil’stvo: monitoring sotsial’nykh zmin. 2020. 7(21). Kyyiv: Instytut sotsiologiyi NAN Ukrayiny. 546 s.
Kharadzhy M.V. 2011. Soptsial’no-psykholohchni kontexty mizhetnichoyi tolerantnosti (Social-psychological contexts of interethnic tolerance). Mizhnarodny forum: sotsiolohiya, psykholohiya, pedahohika, menedzhment. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats’. 6, 141–156.
Khyzhnyak O. Social’ne pryznachennya tolerantnosti (Social purpose of tolerance). Mizhnarodny forum: sotsiolohiya, psykholohiya, pedahohika, menedzhment. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats’. 6, 141–156.
Shelest O.S. 2019. Syspil’na konsolidatsiya u vitchyznyanomu politychnomu dyskursi: vid ponyattya do real’noyi praktyky (Social consolidation in domestic discourse: from the notion to real practice). http://dspace.onu.edu.ua:8080/handle/123456789/30280.
Shul’ha M. 2020. Perezhyvannya osobystistyu stany zakhyshchenosti v suspil’stvi (Zamist’ pislyamovy) [Personal experience of a state of security in society (Instead of an afterword)]. Ukrayins’ke suspil’stvo: monitoring sotsial’nykh zmin. 2020. Vypusk 7 (21). Kyyiv: Instytut sotsiologiyi NAN Ukrayiny, 418–440.
Babajanian Babken. 2012. Social protection and its contribution to social cohesion and state-building. Published by: GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft fьr Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, 12. https://cdn.odi.org/media/documents/7759.pdf.
Beauvais Caroline, Jenson Jane 2002. Social cohesion: Updating the state of the research. CPRN Discussion Paper. No. F| 22. Canadian Policy Research Networks. 62 p. https://www.socialcohesion.info/Зleadmin/user_upload/Beauvais_Jenson_02.pdf
Bernard Paul. 1999. La cohйsion sociale: critique dialectique d’un quasiconcept. Lien social et Politiques. Numйro 41, 47–59. https://id.erudit.org/005057ar
Braaten Leif. 1991. Group cohesion: A new multidimensional model. 15, 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01419845.
Chan J., To H.-P., & Chan E. 2006. Reconsidering social cohesion: Developing a deSnition and analytical framework for empirical research. Social Indicators Research. 75(2), 273–302. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-005-2118-1.
Cheong Pauline Hope, Edwards Rosalind, Goulbourne Harry, Solomos John. 2007. Immigration, social cohesion and social capital: A critical review. Critical Social Policy. 27(1):24-49. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/publication/240690663_Immigration_Social_Cohesion_and_Social_Capital_A_Critical_Review.
Council of Europe. 2004. A new strategy for social cohesion. European Committee for Social Cohesion (CDCS). http://www.coe.int/t/dg3/socialcohesiondev/source/RevisedStrategy_en.pdf.
Delhey Jan, Boehnke Klaus, Dragolov Georgi, Ignбcz ZsуSa S., Larsen Mandi, Lorenz Jan, Koch Michael. 2018. Social cohesion and its correlates: A comparison of Western and Asian societies. Comparative Sociology. 17, 426–455. https://www.doi.org/10.1163/15691330-12341468.
Dragolov Georgi, Ignбcz ZsубSa S., Lorenz Jan, Delhey Jan, Boehnke Klaus. 2013. Social Cohesion Radar measuring common ground: An international comparison of social cohesion methods report. Bertelsmann Stiftung. 56 pp. http://aei.pitt.edu/id/eprint/74134.
Fonseca Xavier, Lukosch Stephan, Brazier Frances. Social cohesion revisited: a new deSnition and how to characterize it. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2018.1497480.
Granovetter Mark S. 1973. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology. 1973. 78(6), 1360–1380. http://snap.stanford.edu/class/cs224w-readings/granovetter73weakties.pdf.
Hepburn Mary A. 1992. Multiculturalism and social cohesion in a democratic society: Is the United States experience a model or an example? https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pdf
Jeannotte Sharon. 2003. Singing alone? The contribution of cultural capital to social cohesion and sustainable communities. International Journal of Cultural Policy. 9(1), 35–49. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228499276_Singing_Alone_The_Contribution_of_Cultural_Capital_to_Social_Cohesion_and_Sustainable_Communities.
Jenson Jane. DeSning and measuring social cohesion. 2010. Commonwealth Secretariat and United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. 44 pp.
Kymlicka Will, 2001. Territorial boundaries: A liberal egalitarian perspective. Boundaries and justice: Diverse ethical perspective’/ Editors: David Miller, Sohai Hashmi. Princenton University Press. P. 249-275. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320841370_Territorial_Boundaries_A_Liberal_Egalitarian_Perspective.
Laurence James, Schmid Katarina, Hewstone Miles. 2019. Ethnic diversity, ethnic threat and social cohesion: (re)-evaluating the role of perceived out-group threat and prejudice in the relationship between community ethnic diversity and intra-community cohesion. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies. 45:3, 395–418. https://www.doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2018.1490638.
Lott Albert, Lott Bernice. 1961. Group cohesiveness, communication level, and conformity. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 62(2), 408–412. http://doi.org/10.1037/h0041109.
Maxwell Judith.1996. Social dimensions in economic growth. Department of Economics, University of Alberta. 36 p.
Nesterova Marja. 2020. Researches of EU values study in education: Inclusion and social cohesion development. Vyscha osvita Ukrainy. 1(76), 49–54.
Niessen Jan. 2000. Diversity and cohesion: New challenges for the integration of immigrants and minorities. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing. 121 p.
OECD. 2021. Perspectives on global development: From protest to progress. OECD Publishing. Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/405e4c32-en.
Rajulton Fernando, Ravanera Zenaida, Roderic Beaujot, 2007. Measuring social cohesion: An experiment using the Canadian National Survey of giving, volunteering and participating. Social Indicator Research, 461–492. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/40763388_Measuring_Social_Cohesion_An_Experiment_using_the_Canadian_National_Survey_of_Giving_Volunteering_and_Participating.
Ravanera Zenaida R., Beaujot Roderic. 2007. Measuring social cohesion: An experiment using the Canadian National Survey of giving, volunteering and participating. Social Indicators Review. https://www.doi.org/10.1007/s11205-006-0011-1.
Reeskens Tim, Botterman Sarah, Hoogle Marc. 2008. Is social cohesion one latent concept? Investigating the dimensionality of social cohesion on the basis of the Kearns and Forrest (2000) typology. 255–264.
Schiefer David, van der Noll Jolanda. 2017. The essentials of social cohesion: A literature review. Social Indicators Research. An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement. 132 (20), 579–603. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11205-016-1314-5.
Social cohesion. Oxford Reference. https://oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100515609.
Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community. 2007. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/TXT/uri=celex:12007L/TXT.
Walters Robert, Zeller Bruno. 2018. Citizenship and national identity has strengthened social cohesion in multicultural Australia. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3185137.
What is social cohesion. Scanlon Institute. https://scanloninstitute.org.au/what-social-cohesion.
##submission.downloads##
Опубліковано
Номер
Розділ
Ліцензія
Автори, які публікуються у цьому журналі, погоджуються з наступними умовами:- Автори залишають за собою право на авторство своєї роботи та передають журналу право першої публікації цієї роботи на умовах ліцензії Creative Commons Attribution License, котра дозволяє іншим особам вільно розповсюджувати опубліковану роботу з обов'язковим посиланням на авторів оригінальної роботи та першу публікацію роботи у цьому журналі.
- Автори мають право укладати самостійні додаткові угоди щодо неексклюзивного розповсюдження роботи у тому вигляді, в якому вона була опублікована цим журналом (наприклад, розміщувати роботу в електронному сховищі установи або публікувати у складі монографії), за умови збереження посилання на першу публікацію роботи у цьому журналі.
- Політика журналу дозволяє і заохочує розміщення авторами в мережі Інтернет (наприклад, у сховищах установ або на особистих веб-сайтах) рукопису роботи, як до подання цього рукопису до редакції, так і під час його редакційного опрацювання, оскільки це сприяє виникненню продуктивної наукової дискусії та позитивно позначається на оперативності та динаміці цитування опублікованої роботи (див. The Effect of Open Access).
